Discouragement wins over several Desjardins members who are victims of identity theft in the wake of the data leak that shook the cooperative in 2019. Some resign themselves to throwing in the towel in the face of the heaviness of the documentary evidence to be provided and give up. the hope of receiving some compensation for fraud committed without their knowledge.
An agreement, reached as part of a class action brought on behalf of the 9.7 million Desjardins members affected by the data breach, provides $1,000 compensation for those who suffered identity theft after 1er January 2017 inclusive.
To receive compensation, claimants must provide “documentary evidence” showing that they committed fraud on their behalf. The process, according to several testimonies collected by The dutysometimes resembles the “madhouse” of Asterix.
Documents impossible to obtain, police reports refused, delay too short to correct a claim in dispute: faced with obstacles, many give up obtaining, one day, any compensation.
Four attempts, four failures
Jean-François Rochette thought he had everything in hand to obtain compensation. At the height of the pandemic, a stranger claimed the Canadian Emergency Response Benefit (CERB) on his behalf. After countless hours on the phone waiting to speak to someone, the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) finally acknowledged the fraud and cleared his file.
The airline pilot, however, had no written proof of his misadventure and its outcome. In his online file, the reimbursement of the $3,000 collected without his knowledge appeared, in addition to an acknowledgment of error on the part of the CRA. The screenshots showing one and the other, thought Mr. Rochette, would be enough to get him the compensation.
To flesh out his claim, he added the documents prepared by his accountant that a fraud had altered his taxes.
His request was initially refused, as the documentary evidence was not sufficient in the eyes of RicePoint, the administrator designated by Desjardins to manage the compensation program. Jean-François Rochette then had 45 days to correct his claim. During this period, he knocked on the doors of four government agencies in the hope of obtaining a document attesting to the fraud suffered. Each time, he received another refusal.
“I first called the Canada Revenue Agency thinking I would get proof, says Mr. Rochette, but she told me that she was not producing any papers attesting to fraud. »
The CRA instead referred him to Service Canada, which redirected him to Revenu Québec, which then redirected him to the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre. No one was able to help him: after having waited again several hours on the phone to explain his situation each time, the pilot saw resignation overtake him.
“I gave up,” he explains. I had until December 19 and I no longer knew where to turn to get my hands on a document. It’s wasted money and time… I’m certainly not the only one: I don’t know anyone for whom it was easy. »
“A document that does not exist”
Sarah Power went through the same journey. She, too, the victim of PCU fraud in the summer of 2020, she had to spend two years fighting to settle her case. “It was wonderful,” she says ironically. Each time, it was necessary to speak to someone who did not know my file and to address people who did not really know what to do. »
The CRA eventually acknowledged the fraud, but only over the phone. “I never received any papers stating that I had been the victim of a crime”, indicates Mme Power. She filed a claim for $1,000 compensation from Desjardins — unsuccessfully.
“I sent two T4s, the first showing the fraudulently collected $6,000 PCU and another canceling them. I also sent screenshots of my statement to the Anti-Fraud Center. To be sure, I also sent a copy of the emails exchanged with my accountant, in addition to attaching a letter I had written to the CRA to explain that I had been the victim of fraud. »
Response from RicePoint: information is missing. Sarah Power contacted the administrator, who was unable to explain to her what specific documents he wanted. A person told him that a letter from the CRA could perhaps unlock his file, the document that Jean-François Rochette tried to obtain, in vain.
“I don’t really want to do business with the agency: I had to call them every month for two years to settle the identity theft,” says Sarah Power.
New mother, she decided to throw in the towel out of spite and lack of time. “I don’t need the $1,000: I’m a doctor,” explains Sarah Power. For me, it’s not a question of money. It’s just for the principle. »
The duty collected three other testimonies stating the difficulty for the claimants to obtain compensation. An accountant, also a victim of fraud at the PCU, Gabriel Laurin, sent a detailed log of events. The duty was able to view the five pages of documents sent to RicePoint. They include, in particular, screenshots of his CRA file, a detailed description of the events and the steps taken, in addition to a report from the Service de police de la Ville de Montréal.
His claim is also denied. “I worked full time during the pandemic, it is impossible that I touched the PCU, he argues. What the administrator is asking me is a conclusion of the investigation. It’s like asking me for something that doesn’t exist! »
“Facilitate the complaint”
When approving the agreement last summer, the Quebec Superior Court specified that members who were victims of identity theft could submit “a variety of documents”, including screenshots, to obtain their compensation. “All of this, added magistrate Claude Bouchard, in order to facilitate [l]a complaint. »
Desjardins told the To have to receiving calls from members requesting documentation to support their claim with RicePoint. The cooperative emphasizes that it is not judge and party in this case: it is the administrator who establishes the eligibility criteria and who determines the validity of the claims.
RicePoint did not respond to questions or an interview request from To have to. According to the legal agreement, the administrator has the obligation to transmit, within the first 120 days of the year, a report indicating in particular the number of claims received — and refused.
The duty contacted two lawyers who led the class action against Desjardins. Mare Karim Diallo and Jérémie Longpré, from the firms Siskinds Desmeules and Kugler Kandestin, indicated that they had never heard of the obstacles encountered by the claimants.
Me Diallo clarifies, however, that the court can formulate new directives if unforeseen difficulties arise in the claims process. The administrator or the claimants can make the request if they deem it necessary.
Sarah Power, for her part, is thinking of leaving Desjardins to take justice into her own hands. “It’s been my fund since I was in primary school, but for the past two years, it’s mainly been the source of a lot of frustration, and I’m thinking of changing institutions. »